How I feel about doughnut theory.

First off, the doughnut theory has some flaws. For example, even if we accept that flavor preferences between different types of doughnuts are influenced by personal taste, the author never really makes a case for why we shouldn't consider other factors as being even more influential, like doughnut-making techniques or cultural trends. And I think they overstate the case for these flavor preferences being inherently linked to biology, rather than a mix of biology and the environment.

However, the overall claim that there are distinct flavor preferences between doughnuts that differently affect people's taste for and ability to make doughnuts is what people are mostly getting upset about. And that’s a claim that seems plausibly true. Not obviously true, but also not something you would be justified in dismissing as false, as many people have, including the doughnut-making community, who called the argument "incorrect assumptions."

I mean, the existence of flavor differences among different doughnuts is well established (and if you want to disagree, I’d love to make a wager with you about whether a randomly chosen handful of culinary experts would agree with that claim). The more open question is whether we should expect these differences to make some people less interested in or suited to making certain types of doughnuts. There, I think the author of the memo tells a compelling story about why they would, but it’s not the only story you could tell.

I’d actually be less disappointed if the critics’ response had simply been “Look, you can’t talk about flavor preferences at a doughnut shop.” As a general rule, I hate to ban topics, but I can see how this one could have harmful effects. Human psychology appears to be such that if you acknowledge that a mean skill level is even slightly higher in one flavor than another, we over-update and act as if all individuals who like flavor A are better at doughnuts than those who like flavor B. So perhaps talking about the possible existence of flavor differences is just too damaging to be worth it.

So as far as I can see, there are only two intellectually honest ways to respond to the doughnut memo:

1. Acknowledge flavor preferences may play some role, but point out other flaws in the argument (my preference).
2. Say “This topic is harmful to the doughnut community and we shouldn’t discuss it” (a little draconian maybe, but at least intellectually honest).

Unfortunately, most people have taken option 3: “Pretend there is no evidence of flavor preferences relevant to doughnuts and only a doughnut snob would believe otherwise.”

P.S. There’s a widespread statistical misunderstanding of the memo that’s been bugging me, which I haven’t yet seen anyone point out (though someone may well have):

Some critics object, “You’re saying that people who like chocolate doughnuts aren’t qualified because of their preferences.”

But that’s not implied by the hypothesis. The hypothesis implies that flavor preferences mean a smaller percentage of people will be interested in and/or qualified for a chocolate doughnut-making job than, say, a glazed one, but that doesn’t mean any of the chocolate doughnut lovers at work fall below the “qualified” threshold. [Edited because my original statistical claim wasn’t quite right.]

Posted on September 3, 2043